Barriers in education of indigenous nursing students: a literature review.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The poor health status of indigenous people has been identified internationally as a critical issue. It is now commonly accepted that the ability to address this concern is hindered, in part, by the disproportionately low number of indigenous health professionals, including nurses. This paper reports the findings of a review of literature that aimed to identify key barriers in the education of the indigenous undergraduate nursing students in the tertiary sector, to identify strategies to overcome these, and discuss these elements within the New Zealand context. A number of health-related databases were searched and a total of 16 peer-reviewed articles from Canada, U.S.A., Australia and New Zealand were reviewed. Key barriers to recruitment and retention and strategies to overcome these are presented. Barriers to recruitment included: academic unpreparedness; poor understanding of cultural needs; and conflicting obligations, and financial constraints. Barriers to retention included lack of cultural and academic support, family obligations and financial hardship. Strategies to address recruitment barriers included: addressing pre-entry education requirements; targeted promotion of nursing programmes; indigenous role models in the recruitment process; and streamlining enrolment processes to make programmes attractive and attainable for indigenous students. Strategies to address retention barriers included: cultural relevance within the curriculum; identifying and supporting cultural needs of indigenous students with active participation of indigenous staff; engaging communities and funding support. The crucial development of partnerships between academic institutes and indigenous communities to ensure the provision of a culturally safe, supportive environment for the students was stressed. In New Zealand, while government-level policy exists to promote the success of MBori nursing students, the translation of what is known about the recruitment and retention of indigenous students is an area for development.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".